WH to Senate Intel chair: Hey, sorry for the oversight on following the law, or something

posted at 2:01 pm on June 3, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Ironically, the White House apology to Sen. Dianne Feinstein over the lack of notification about the swap that freed Bowe Bergdahl for five high-value Taliban detainees chalked the whole thing up to an “oversight” — which is exactly what the Obama administration wanted to avoid. Feinstein didn’t take the apology well, especially since it came more than 48 hours after Barack Obama’s Rose Garden speech with the fully-informed parents of Bowe Bergdahl in attendance:

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein took at shot at the Obama administration on Tuesday for failing to give lawmakers 30 days’ notice about a deal to release five Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the only POW from America’s war in Afghanistan.

“It’s very disappointing that there was not a level of trust sufficient to justify alerting us,” Feinstein told reporters in the Capitol.

That’s bitter scorn, not a lament. As Feinstein knows full well, the White House doesn’t have to justify informing Congress on GITMO releases — they’re required to do so by law. Furthermore, the White House knew that requirement full well, long before this transfer took place. The scorn becomes more apparent when Feinstein was asked to unpack the “oversight” remark:

Feinstein said that National Deputy Security Adviser Tony Blinken called her Monday night “apologizing” for failing to notify lawmakers sooner.

“He apologized for it and said it was an oversight,” Feinstein said. When asked whether he used the word “oversight,” Feinstein clarified: “In so many words, I can’t say. That was my impression.”

Feinstein went further in her criticism by noting that opposition to the release of these five detainees had been almost unanimous among the intelligence committee members in 2011. And despite the arguments offered by the White House that they needed Bergdahl back no matter how he’d been captured, Feinstein suggested that his status mattered in the equation:

She said the chairmen and ranking Republicans of the “connected committees” spent a lot of time in 2011 reviewing the possibility of a prisoner swap and came out firmly opposed to releasing senior militants from the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay.

“There were very strong views and they were virtually unanimous against the trade,” she said.

“I certainly want to know more about whether this man was a deserter,” she said of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was released to American special forces in return for the freedom of five senior Taliban commanders.

Had their minds changed in three years? The Obama administration wouldn’t know. Despite their claims that they had been continuously consulting with Congress on the swap, House Intelligence Committee chair Mike Rogers (R-MI) told Morning Joe earlier today that the last consultation the White House conducted:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers on Tuesday said that Congress hadn’t heard from the Obama administration since 2011 on the possibility of a prisoner swap with the Taliban.

The Michigan Republican also cast doubt on the administration’s claims that it had to act due to Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s health, saying, “Their public rhetoric does not match the facts on the ground.”

President Barack Obama, speaking in Poland earlier Tuesday morning, said administration officials “have consulted with Congress for quite some time” about the possibility of a prisoner exchange.

But Rogers, appearing on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” said Congress hadn’t heard anything from the White House in years and that the administration only informed them of the deal after it had already taken place.

“I don’t know what he means by consulted Congress for some time,” Rogers said in response to Obama’s comments. “In 2011, they did come up and present a plan that included a prisoner transfer that was, in a bipartisan way, pushed back. We hadn’t heard anything since on any details of any prisoner exchange.”

He said that administration officials met with the relevant national security committees in 2011 to discuss the potential freeing of some U.S. prisoners as an act of “goodwill,” which the lawmakers resoundingly rejected. He said that the only thing Congress had seen since 2011 concerning Bergdahl was a proof of life video released in December 2013.

Is there any part of the Obama administration narrative that hasn’tfallen apart?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

He said that administration officials met with the relevant national security committees in 2011 to discuss the potential freeing of some U.S. prisoners as an act of “goodwill,” which the lawmakers resoundingly rejected.

The problem for Western lefties is that they think all people are rational actors who accept the compromise/negotiation model of dealing with conflict.

The lefties cannot comprehend a culture in which concessions are admissions of weakness, not good will, and a “death cult” belief system like radical Islam, which would kill its own children as martyrs to achieve goals many years, even centuries from now.

Is there any part of the Obama administration narrative that hasn’t fallen apart?

Even worse, with the narrative in total and complete collapse, look at the extent that that trolls, apparatchiks, and sycophants are willing to create and embrace in order to defend that collapsed narrative…

I suspect the reason this whole Bergdahl exchange came about and was so rushed was to get the VA scandal off the front pages. Unfortunately, in not doing its homework and in underestimating the reaction of Bergdahl’s brothers in arms, the Obama admin has only inflamed the military community, vets, and supporters of our military even more. Rather than displacing the VA scandal, it looks like the O-admin has added fuel to the conflagration of incompetence now burning in the executive branch. Someone is gonna get burned here.

I saw on facebook an image that went something to the effect that if Obama ate puppies on live TV from the white house lawn the press would fall all over themselves saying he was making the world safe for cats.

I suspect the reason this whole Bergdahl exchange came about and was so rushed was to get the VA scandal off the front pages. Unfortunately, in not doing its homework and in underestimating the reaction of Bergdahl’s brothers in arms, the Obama admin has only inflamed the military community, vets, and supporters of our military even more. Rather than displacing the VA scandal, it looks like the O-admin has added fuel to the conflagration of incompetence now burning in the executive branch. Someone is gonna get burned here.
Jazz on June 3, 2014 at 2:14 PM
It’s kind of amusing really he just opened a can of black mamba’s…

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

He’s hoping to do insane things that will push some veteran to do something crazy. Just say no to this folks.

we’re more comfortable with Obama wielding this sort of power because he seems a hell of a lot more effective and responsible with it.
urban elitist on February 8, 2012 at 9:33 PM
He can’t weild much of anything well he caused a whole new scandal while trying to avoid another one.

HE BROKE THE LAW, HE DECLARED YESTERDAY ‘I NEVER LIKED THAT LAW’ AND THAT HE HAD NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE FOR.

HE IS VIOLATING BOTH CONSTITUTION AND LAW AT WILL BECAUSE HE KNOWS NO POLITICIAN HAS THE COURAGE OR CONVICTION TO DO ANYTHING TO HIM.

HE CONTINUES TO PROVE HE IS AN ‘ENEMY OF THE STATE’, HIS OATH OF OFFICE MEANS NOTHING, AND THAT HE WILL CONTINUE TO DO WHATEVER HE WANTS WHEN HE WANTS, EVEN WHEN IT PUTS THIS NATION’S NATIONAL SECURITY AT STAKE!

Take it easy there, easy. Obama wants someone to snap. That’s the only thing that will save him. Sometimes it’s better to let the arugula rot on the vine, than to pick it and have people blame you for the missing arugula.

He isn’t going to be impeached because he’s black. He knows he won’t be impeached and is taking full advantage of it. He’s playing with house money for the next 2 years and flipping the bird to the U.S. citizens. Win-win for him.

HE MUST BE IMPEACHED NOW!
easyt65 on June 3, 2014 at 2:23 PM
Take it easy there, easy. Obama wants someone to snap. That’s the only thing that will save him. Sometimes it’s better to let the arugula rot on the vine, than to pick it and have people blame you for the missing arugula.
faraway on June 3, 2014 at 2:35 PM Pride comes before the wall with a narcisstic man like Obama you just let him hang himself just merely lend him the figurative rope.

We need to keep dumping all his criminal activity onto the Dems however we can do it. Eventually it will reach a tipping point and they will have to do something about him. Make sure everything he does is blamed on them. On Republican quizlings while we’re at it.

“I certainly want to know more about whether this man was a deserter,” she said of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was released to American special forces in return for the freedom of five senior Taliban commanders.

He isn’t going to be impeached because he’s black. He knows he won’t be impeached and is taking full advantage of it. He’s playing with house money for the next 2 years and flipping the bird to the U.S. citizens. Win-win for him.

butch on June 3, 2014 at 2:40 PM

This^^^^

Although if impeachment ever was initiated I don’t think he would mind that either. It would at the very least motivate his base -which he desperately needs for the mid-terms, and it could backfire on Republicans while he gains sympathy points.

Actually Vetoing the bill was not an option. This was not a stand alone bill concerning notifying Congress when contemplating release of detainees at GITMO. It was the Defense Authorization Act, the Act that funds the Department of Defense.

Having said that, the President (well most Presidents are) is bound by oath to “faithfully execute the laws”. One more example of his lawless administration.

The Bergdahl for 5 terrorists trade was great for Obama. He got 5 prisoners closer to closing Gitmo and got back a guy who will publicly blame Bush for the Afghans hating us. If those 5 terrorists kill other Americans, that’s the next President’s problem.

I keep seeing him referred to as a POW. My understanding is that he was never officially listed as a POW. Am I wrong?

Rancher on June 3, 2014 at 2:26 PM

He was initially listed as DUSTWIN (duty status – whereabouts unknown) so there is a message out there that was released within 24 hours of him being discovered as missing. Not sure what the Army did after that, nor am I sure if they ever classified him as a POW.

I am not seeing anything honorable or distinctive about Obama, Hillary, Susan Rice and the whole WH national security contingent’s behavior in this episode. This is epic FAIL. And do we listen to them or our lying eyes & ears?

It is obvious that you people are not recognizing the sheer genius of Barack Obama. In order to get a real treaty and a recognizable on going peace with the Taliban, President Obama has to do one thing. The five Taliban leaders who have been released will be offered high ranking positions in the Pentagon. #1. We can have one put in charge of the Air Force. #2. The next Taliban leader will be put in charge of the U.S. Navy. #3 will be put in charge of the U.S. Army. #4 will put in charge of the U.S. Marines. #5 will be put in charge of the Coast Guard. This is the only way a harmonious and peaceful and long lasting treaty can be forged with the Muslim nation’s ! And all this is due to the dynamic-leadership of President Barack Obama !